[USML Announce] Invite to Lambeau

Tue Sep 28 09:00:55 EDT 2010

If you're serious, you're on. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 28, 2010, at 8:39 AM, "Blocker, Mark B." <mblocker at Sidley.com> wrote:

> Jeff:  let me know if you want to join me at Lambeau on January 2 to
> watch the re-match.  We can discuss where things stand then.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On
> Behalf Of Jeff Winick
> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 8:35 AM
> To: USML Announcements
> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Really?
> 
> Mark,
> 
> I'm afraid a thank you isn't appropriate. Although I confess that I'm
> impressed (and a little disappointed) by the inability of the Packer
> fans to acknowledge defeat (any more pathetic excuses to offer up?) the
> Pack didn't give this game away. They got beat. The better team on
> Monday night was the Bears. That's right. I said it. The Packers
> offensive line was worse. The running backs were every bit as bad. The
> defensive backfield was worse. The discipline was worse. And you could
> go on forever. 
> 
> You're certainly right that Arod is the better QB. But I'm not unhappy
> with Cutler. He's good enough to deliver a victory. Just ask the guys
> who were trying to cover Knox and Olson on the final drive. 
> 
> The bottom line is that a team that was picked to win the Super Bowl
> just got beat by a team that was picked to go 6-9. That's all the Bears
> fans are saying. We've never proclaimed the Bears to be a great team.
> They aren't. But they're good enough to beat a heartless squad of
> Greenies. And that is reason to rejoice. 
> 
> Go Bears!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Sep 28, 2010, at 8:18 AM, "Blocker, Mark B." <mblocker at Sidley.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Jeff:
>> 
>> Really, some fact checking on your part would help.  Matt Forte has
>> 110 yards rushing -- for the season -- so which of your comments about
>> absence of running game/offensive line does not apply to the Bears?
>> 
>> As for penalties, I think John is saying that the alleged
> interference
>> on Bennett was the 18th and decisive penalty.  And I think you may be
> on
>> to something with the missed holding call; refs never miss a single
>> penalty in any game, especially holding.
>> 
>> I agree with you though that ARod is a great QB.  Cutler is not.  
>> 
>> Anyway, I would prefer if you just said thank you.  The Bears won't
>> get a more gift-wrapped game than that one.
>> 
>> -- Mark B.  
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On
>> Behalf Of Jeff Winick
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 8:07 AM
>> To: USML Announcements
>> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Really?
>> 
>> Fruiter is correct. 43 yards. My mistake. That certainly makes all the
>> difference in the world. 
>> 
>> I am curious about the penalties. Which one cost them the game? The
>> holding call that gave Arod enough time to find Finley?  One of the
> two
>> egregiously stupid personal fouls in the winning drive?  Hard to know
>> which one you're referring to.  There are so many to choose from.
>> Actually I thought the missed holding call (Peppers) on Arod's rushing
>> touchdown was the only thing that kept you in the game. Was that the
>> one?  But you still lost. 
>> 
>> 18 penalties and an inability to strike quickly with an admittedly
> great
>> QB due to the utter absence of a running game and an offensive line
> that
>> doesn't know how to block without jumping or holding. That's what I
> saw.
>> Apparently you were watching a different game. 
>> 
>> TOeFuKi
>> 
>> P. S. That was for you Buddha. Hope you appreciate this analysis as
>> well. 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On Sep 28, 2010, at 6:51 AM, "JOHN FRUIT, FAF ADVISORS INC."
>> <jfruit1 at bloomberg.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> for the record, the Packers' RBs had 43 yds rushing to the Bears' RBs
>> 38.  The  
>>> Packers had 18 penalties....if they would have had 17 penalties, the
>> Bears      
>>> would not have won, period.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -------
>>> Material based on data from sources deemed reliable;
>> accuracy/completeness not guaranteed. Not for use as a primary basis
> of
>> investment decisions; not to be construed to meet needs of any
> investor.
>> Not a representation or solicitation of an offer to sell/buy any
>> security. Securities may not be eligible for solicitation in all
> states.
>> Opinions subject to change. Past performance does not guarantee future
>> results.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> announce mailing list
>>> announce at usml.net
>>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>> _______________________________________________
>> announce mailing list
>> announce at usml.net
>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>> 
>> 
>> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------------------
>> IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To comply with certain U.S. Treasury
> regulations, we inform you
>> that, unless expressly stated otherwise, any U.S. federal tax advice
> contained in this
>> communication, including attachments, was not intended or written to
> be used, and cannot be
>> used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that
> may be imposed on such 
>> taxpayer by the Internal Revenue Service. In addition, if any such tax
> advice is used or referred
>> to by other parties in promoting, marketing or recommending any
> partnership or other entity,
>> investment plan or arrangement, then (i) the advice should be
> construed as written in connection
>> with the promotion or marketing by others of the transaction(s) or
> matter(s) addressed in this
>> communication and (ii) the taxpayer should seek advice based on the
> taxpayer's particular
>> circumstances from an independent tax advisor.
>> 
> ************************************************************************
> ****************************
>> This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is
> privileged or confidential.
>> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and
> any attachments and notify us
>> immediately.
>> 
>> 
> ************************************************************************
> ****************************
>> _______________________________________________
>> announce mailing list
>> announce at usml.net
>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce